Jump to content
The Education Forum

Robert Harris and the CE399 Tom Foolery!


Recommended Posts

I think the memo said ''satisfied'', and Katz meant it, and this has not occured, so the memo stands, unfulfilled. (2bits)

This is from the HSCA reports,

Mr. CORNWELL. ...it has been reported to us by our research staff that

in the L.B.J. Library in Austin there is a memo prepared by, or reflecting

a conversation between, Mr. Hoover and the White House, Walter Jenkins.

The conversation reflects that Hoover made the following statement:

"The thing I am most concerned about, and Mr. Katzenbach, is having

something issued so that they can convince the public that Oswald is the

real assassin,"

It is enlightening that just a few days after that, in a phone conversation between LBJ and Hoover, Hoover suggested that the reason Connally was wounded was that he came between JFK and a sniper.

Of course, that is not what happened but Hoover, who was very tight with the mob always knew that the crime was not the result of a single shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

JFK Analysis of a Shooting

The Ultimate Ballistics Truth Exposed

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/06/prweb4091594.htm

http://www.jfkanalysis.com/

I have not read this book; just came across it today.

The summary is not too inspiring, IMO. It sounds like Mr. Martin just decided to write a book presenting his (apparently untested) theories. Still, hopefully the book will make some points and present some fresh arguments...

I couldn't agree more. Anyone claiming that he has a technique to trace the source of bullet trajectories in the Zapruder film, using anything more than basic geometry is pitching pure voodoo science. This is reminiscent of the guy (forgot his name) who claimed he could see "bullet trails" in the film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JFK Analysis of a Shooting

The Ultimate Ballistics Truth Exposed

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/06/prweb4091594.htm

http://www.jfkanalysis.com/

I have not read this book; just came across it today.

The summary is not too inspiring, IMO. It sounds like Mr. Martin just decided to write a book presenting his (apparently untested) theories. Still, hopefully the book will make some points and present some fresh arguments...

I couldn't agree more. Anyone claiming that he has a technique to trace the source of bullet trajectories in the Zapruder film, using anything more than basic geometry is pitching pure voodoo science. This is reminiscent of the guy (forgot his name) who claimed he could see "bullet trails" in the film.

Robert,

How very right you are there, with one exception. A bit of geometry and a bit of trigonometry is all it takes to at least get you in the ball park. However these methods are far more valuable in eliminating shooting positions than proving them, but certainly once many are removed only a few remain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Counterpunch from Jimmy D

Mr. Williams:

I just proved that CE 399 was not found at Parkland. Understand?

Jim D

I like to learn.

Can you post, or provide a link to the proof?

Duncan, I would urge you to watch the video I made on this subject. After you see it, perhaps you can provide some answers that other LN advocates have not.

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/10/HKwqhf0MYio

and part two,

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/9/SQDp8tBJhC4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Counterpunch from Jimmy D

Mr. Williams:

I just proved that CE 399 was not found at Parkland. Understand?

Jim D

I like to learn.

Can you post, or provide a link to the proof?

Duncan, I would urge you to watch the video I made on this subject. After you see it, perhaps you can provide some answers that other LN advocates have not.

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/10/HKwqhf0MYio

and part two,

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/9/SQDp8tBJhC4

Duncan,

I would urge you to watch it as well. Everyone should view an assumptive comedy on a nice Sunday Morning!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Counterpunch from Jimmy D

Mr. Williams:

I just proved that CE 399 was not found at Parkland. Understand?

Jim D

I like to learn.

Can you post, or provide a link to the proof?

Duncan, I would urge you to watch the video I made on this subject. After you see it, perhaps you can provide some answers that other LN advocates have not.

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/10/HKwqhf0MYio

and part two,

http://www.youtube.com/user/bobharris77#p/u/9/SQDp8tBJhC4

Duncan,

I would urge you to watch it as well. Everyone should view an assumptive comedy on a nice Sunday Morning!

Mike

I would like to ask, and this may seem a bit simple where would the actual crosshairs be pointing at for the head shot

On 22/11/63 and also on the date of Fraziers test thanks

Ian

Edited by Ian Kingsbury
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image004.jpg

Erasing and forgery indeed LMAO!

I dont know why Robert would not have used this very photo from Hunt's article, surely he knew it existed, and it clearly shows none of the "erasure marks" Bob keeps squalkin about!

How ridiculous.

I can't believe that even you would be stupid enough to make an argument like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

image004.jpg

Erasing and forgery indeed LMAO!

I dont know why Robert would not have used this very photo from Hunt's article, surely he knew it existed, and it clearly shows none of the "erasure marks" Bob keeps squalkin about!

How ridiculous.

I can't believe that even you would be stupid enough to make an argument like this.

Yes even I would be stupid enough to post a clear photo that shows no igns of the tampering you yearn for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

image004.jpg

Erasing and forgery indeed LMAO!

I dont know why Robert would not have used this very photo from Hunt's article, surely he knew it existed, and it clearly shows none of the "erasure marks" Bob keeps squalkin about!

How ridiculous.

I can't believe that even you would be stupid enough to make an argument like this.

Yes even I would be stupid enough to post a clear photo that shows no igns of the tampering you yearn for.

Will somebody actually explain what this is?

It appears to be initials on an evidence envelope.

What was in the envelope again? Bullet and bullet fragments?

Is that what it is?

And if it is, can anyone just give us the names of those associted with the intitials?

Thanks,

Bill Kelly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

image004.jpg

Erasing and forgery indeed LMAO!

I dont know why Robert would not have used this very photo from Hunt's article, surely he knew it existed, and it clearly shows none of the "erasure marks" Bob keeps squalkin about!

How ridiculous.

I can't believe that even you would be stupid enough to make an argument like this.

Yes even I would be stupid enough to post a clear photo that shows no igns of the tampering you yearn for.

Will somebody actually explain what this is?

It appears to be initials on an evidence envelope.

What was in the envelope again? Bullet and bullet fragments?

Is that what it is?

And if it is, can anyone just give us the names of those associted with the intitials?

Thanks,

Bill Kelly

Why not have a look back through the thread Bill, wont cost a dime. But as usual, Ill spell it out for ya.

Its the envelope you and that simpleton James DiEugenio had a fit over.

Its the envelope that your pal Harris used to speculate, and assume, that there was a forgery. He cites Hunts article, and guess what I find when reading the article.....this little original scan that show all the dark erasure marks Harris claims is bunk.

And the best part is Harris knew this prime photo was there! And refused to use it....I wonder why?

Is this the sort of shoddy work that you and James DiEugenio support?

Can you really trust a man who tells me:

Demanding that I "prove" JFK balled his hand into a fist and then fell to his left, is a classic example. And so is your claim that the reactions were caused by the limousine braking. Any idiot knows those are bogus arguments. It was like demanding that I prove the limo was black.~Robert Harris

Your little buddy Harris there does not even know the color of the limo for Christ sake. No wonder you and the loon platoon are so lost.

Edited by Mike Williams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image004.jpg

Erasing and forgery indeed LMAO!

I dont know why Robert would not have used this very photo from Hunt's article, surely he knew it existed, and it clearly shows none of the "erasure marks" Bob keeps squalkin about!

How ridiculous.

I can't believe that even you would be stupid enough to make an argument like this.

Yes even I would be stupid enough to post a clear photo that shows no igns of the tampering you yearn for.

Will somebody actually explain what this is?

It appears to be initials on an evidence envelope.

What was in the envelope again? Bullet and bullet fragments?

Is that what it is?

And if it is, can anyone just give us the names of those associted with the intitials?

Thanks,

Bill Kelly

Why not have a look back through the thread Bill, wont cost a dime. But as usual, Ill spell it out for ya.

Its the envelope you and that simpleton James DiEugenio had a fit over.

Its the envelope that your pal Harris used to speculate, and assume, that there was a forgery. He cites Hunts article, and guess what I find when reading the article.....this little original scan that show all the dark erasure marks Harris claims is bunk.

Is this the sort of shoddy work that you and James DiEugenio support?

Can you really trust a man who tells me:

Demanding that I "prove" JFK balled his hand into a fist and then fell to his left, is a classic example. And so is your claim that the reactions were caused by the limousine braking. Any idiot knows those are bogus arguments. It was like demanding that I prove the limo was black.~Robert Harris

Your little buddy Harris there does not even know the color of the limo for Christ sake. No wonder you and the loon platoon are so lost.

I ask what it is and you attack me, dieugenio and Harris, when I just ask you simply what it is?

Thanks,

Bill Kelly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

image004.jpg

Erasing and forgery indeed LMAO!

I dont know why Robert would not have used this very photo from Hunt's article, surely he knew it existed, and it clearly shows none of the "erasure marks" Bob keeps squalkin about!

How ridiculous.

I can't believe that even you would be stupid enough to make an argument like this.

Yes even I would be stupid enough to post a clear photo that shows no igns of the tampering you yearn for.

Will somebody actually explain what this is?

It appears to be initials on an evidence envelope.

What was in the envelope again? Bullet and bullet fragments?

Is that what it is?

And if it is, can anyone just give us the names of those associted with the intitials?

Thanks,

Bill Kelly

Why not have a look back through the thread Bill, wont cost a dime. But as usual, Ill spell it out for ya.

Its the envelope you and that simpleton James DiEugenio had a fit over.

Its the envelope that your pal Harris used to speculate, and assume, that there was a forgery. He cites Hunts article, and guess what I find when reading the article.....this little original scan that show all the dark erasure marks Harris claims is bunk.

Is this the sort of shoddy work that you and James DiEugenio support?

Can you really trust a man who tells me:

Demanding that I "prove" JFK balled his hand into a fist and then fell to his left, is a classic example. And so is your claim that the reactions were caused by the limousine braking. Any idiot knows those are bogus arguments. It was like demanding that I prove the limo was black.~Robert Harris

Your little buddy Harris there does not even know the color of the limo for Christ sake. No wonder you and the loon platoon are so lost.

I ask what it is and you attack me, dieugenio and Harris, when I just ask you simply what it is?

Thanks,

Bill Kelly

If you did not know what it was, then what was the point of your blazing me earlier in this very thread?

Mike, you are the issue for using the forum to attack Robert Harris and to announce your attack in the head of the thread. Who is Tom Foolery? He's in the headline next to Robert Harris and CE399? And then you point out that he got one thing wrong in his film and you call it a fabrication. It is only a fabrication if he knew it was wrong ahead of time and I don't think he did, and since he's now been corrected, we all know it is Fritz's initials upside down. Evidence is not about Bob Harris or David Von Pein, its about the envelope, who had possession of the envelop, and what's in it. Now if we can weigh a postage stamp, why can't we weigh a few bullet fragments - all four of them, or both of them, and what happened to the whole bullet? That was different than CE399 wasn't it? And what did Nurse Bell tell the HSCA and ARRB about it?

And someone is misrepresenting you - David Von Pein - he's the one misrepresenting the truth in this case and he should not even be mentioned in any serious research, especially in regards to any ballistics that you want to be considered at all. The bottom line is the evidence, and not those who misrepresent it - like Von Pein. I don't know Robert Harris, but anybody who can sturr the displeasure of DVP is a friend of mine.

Bill Kelly

I might also add that this is hardly a single case.

First you ask me

How much does a postage stamp weight, and how much is missing from CE399?

TO which I replied

The average stamp weights about a gram, or 15 grains. We know that 399 has much less loss. However a grain is 1/7000th of a pound. I hardly think we can determine anything conclusively by what anyone guessed, considering the minute weight involved.

I think the most 399 could weigh is 162. Loss from firing .4-.6 grains. So that leaves us with 161.5 potentially (using the average of .4 to.6)

Found it weighed 158.6 so it would have a loss of no more than 2.9 grains.

As you know Bill I am hardly one to support the SBT, at least not yet. So I really have no dog in this race.

And your counter

What do you mean what the average stamp weighs? Can't they weight bullet fragments?

Is that how you determine ballistics, compare the weight of bullet fragments to average postage stamps and then weight the stamp to see how much the bullet fragment weighs?

What kind of investigation is that?

Amazing considering I answered the question you asked, then you bash me for it.

Then you come up today and have no clue what the friggin thread is about.....this whole evidence thing must be challenging for you, when you can't remember what the hell you were talking about LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forget Harris, Dieugenio, Von Pain and everybody else.

Can anyone give me an accurate description of what that photo is that contains the initials and where it comes from, without dragging it through the mud?

Thanks,

Bill Kelly

Sure Bill, its CE842. The envelope Harris claims is forged.

So do you think we should get a better start now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...